Well this could get interesting
Obama is trying to rush the confirmation of his new Attorney General through the Senate before the newly elected Republican majority takes over. But there are plenty of reasons why Senators on both sides of the aisle should have great pause before approving Loretta Lynch.
In recent months, much has been written about the concept of "civil asset forfeiture," in which police routinely steal billions of dollars worth of private property without even so much as criminal charges. As it turns out, Loretta Lynch is all for it, and her US attorney’s office has benefited from it to the tune of nearly a BILLION dollars.
from Wall Street Journal:
As a prosecutor Ms. Lynch has also been aggressive in pursuing civil asset forfeiture, which has become a form of policing for profit. She recently announced that her office had collected more than $904 million in criminal and civil actions in fiscal 2013, according to the Brooklyn Daily Eagle. Liberals and conservatives have begun to question forfeiture as an abuse of due process that can punish the innocent.
Civil asset forfeiture is one of the greatest threats to private property in modern America, and Lynch is one of the pioneering legal minds in the country advocating it. It is one of the worst practices in police work today, and President Obama wants to make one of the worst offenders the nation’s top cop.
This alone should be enough to completely toss Lynch’s nomination, but that’s not going to stop President Obama from doing his utmost to cram it through.
- See more at: http://poorrichardsn.....CTTF2.dpuf
interesting article on the practice
You don't have to be convicted of a crime — or even accused of one — for police to seize your car or other property. It's legal. Several videos online are shedding some light on the controversial practice.
The practice is called civil asset forfeiture, and every year it brings cities millions of dollars in revenue, which often goes directly to the police budget. Police confiscate cars, jewelry, cash and homes they think are connected to crime. But the people these things belong to may have done nothing wrong.
In one video posted by The New York Times, Harry S. Connelly, the city attorney of Las Cruces, N.M., gleefully describes how the city collects these "little goodies," calling it a "gold mine."
He describes to a roomful of local officials from across the state how Las Cruces police officers waited outside a bar for a man they hoped would walk out drunk because they "could hardly wait" to get their hands on his 2008 Mercedes, which they then hoped to put up for auction.
"We could be czars," he tells the room. "We could own the city. We could be in the real estate business."
It is legal for law enforcement agencies to take property from people who haven't been convicted of a crime.
Ezekiel Edwards, director of the criminal law reform project at the ACLU, tells NPR you don't even have to be charged with a crime.
"That's one of the surprising things to people," Edwards says. "It's also what makes it so rife for abuse."
The concept is that police are, in theory, bringing charges against the property. They are saying this property is being used in the furtherance of a crime. That's why, Edwards says, the cases are titled U.S. v. $4,000. Or U.S. v. White Cadillac.
Prosecutors say the seizures are helpful tools to combat drug dealers and drunken drivers. But for people who haven't committed a crime, the cases are expensive to contest and often disproportionately affect people without means or access to a lawyer.
Some states in recent years have told local police departments they can no longer keep the proceeds of the seizures for the general fund for the department. The money, for example, may have to be earmarked for a fund for drunk driving prevention. But some local municipalities have gotten around that rule by partnering in seizure cases with the federal government, which shares the money collected and has no such restrictions.
19 Feb ’12
I read on another site a couple years back, about this and how there are people that convince and train local police departments how to do this. Not sure how they get paid, but it's sickening.
Not really an incident, but I had an incident a year ago. As a lot of you know, I'm heavily involved in scouting, and in charge of our pack's fundraising efforts (specifically the annual popcorn sale). Last year, we sold $24,000 in popcorn. While I know it wasn't smart, I was keeping all the funds at my house. Well when the sale ended, I went to the bank to make the deposit. I was bleeping my pants, because I'm driving to the bank with a brown bag with $16,000 in cash. I knew that if I got pulled over, that the money would be confiscated. Then the icing on the cake was when I made the deposit, they collected my SS # along with my drivers license, even though it wasn't my bank account.
they were checking to see if you are a terrorist
well, are you?
My wife normally goes to PA every summer for 2 weeks, while she was gone one year, I would just hold onto the deposits then when she got back, she took them to the bank
So we had 12 different deposits that total were just over 10,000 dollars, they still took down all her information, I no longer do that
Most Users Ever Online: 698
Currently Online:
22 Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
easytapper: 2149
DangerDuke: 2030
groinkick: 1667
PorkChopsMmm: 1515
Gravel Road: 1455
Newest Members:
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 12
Topics: 11482
Posts: 58640
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 2
Members: 19842
Moderators: 0
Admins: 1
Administrators: K